PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 17, 2012
Declares that the House of Representatives should observe a minute of silence to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the 1972 Munich Olympics terrorist attack and remember those who lost their lives.
Urges the International Olympic Committee to: (1) take the opportunity afforded by that anniversary to remind the world that the Olympics were established to send a message of hope and peace through sport and athletic competition; and (2) recognize those who lost their lives at the 1972 Munich Olympics with a minute of silence at every future Olympics Opening Ceremony, beginning with the 2012 London Summer Olympic Games, in an effort to reject and repudiate terrorism as antithetical to the Olympic goal of peaceful competition.
People & committees
Rep. Engel, Eliot L. [D-NY-17] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.Res.663 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.Res.663 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.Res.663 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.Res.663 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.